Antolovich v. Brown Group Retail, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiffs’ “speculation that they would have found relevant, useful evidence” if documents had been timely disclosed did not warrant a new trial
• holding that plaintiffs waived claims of irregularities by failing to make contemporaneous objections
• stating that the court need not find excusable neglect for the requested extension
• explaining that trespass requires an intent to intrude on the land of another
• declining to review appellants’ arguments under C.R.C.P. 59 and 60 because they reflected a “shotgun approach” and set forth “little analysis”
• declining to review appellants’ arguments under C.R.C.P. 59 and 60 because they reflected a “shotgun approach” and set forth “little analysis”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).